The Gujarat High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against Surat textile trader Bharat Harjibhai Shankar in a case concerning the sale of sarees and fabric printed with images of Gautama Buddha, ruling that ordinary sale of religious imagery does not by itself establish a deliberate or malicious intent to insult religious sentiments.
The complaint was registered at Salabatpura police station in Surat in December 2017 after Kunal Sonawane, president of the Samast Yuva Ambedkari Samaj, alleged that sarees and other fabric bearing Buddha’s image were being sold in textile markets. The complaint claimed that the image appeared on the lower portion of the sarees, where it could come near people’s feet, causing offence to members of the Buddhist community.
According to the report, Sonawane filed the complaint on December 19, 2017, after community representatives informed him about the sale of the products. Police registered a case against four traders on December 21, including Shankar of Vankar Textile Market, Prakash Shekharchand Shani of Anand Textile Market, Ravi Sureshbhai Jain of Surat Textile Market and a shopkeeper from Radha Krishna Textile Market.
Shankar later approached the High Court seeking cancellation of the complaint and related proceedings. His lawyer argued that he was a known Surat trader who bought and sold fabric according to market trends and had no malicious or deliberate intention to hurt religious sentiments. The lawyer also claimed that the complaint had been filed to exert pressure because of business competition.
The High Court referred to Supreme Court judgments on Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code. It observed that an offence under the provision requires a deliberate and malicious intention to outrage religious feelings or promote social disorder. The court held that merely selling fabric carrying a religious symbol or an image of a religious figure does not, by itself, demonstrate such an intention.
After examining photographs and the police report, the court found no material showing that Shankar had acted with the intention of insulting any religion. It concluded that the necessary ingredients of an offence under Section 295A were not established in the case and allowed his application. All legal proceedings connected with the case against the applicant were consequently quashed.
